I am so sick of hearing about steroids. Who cares at this point? They were not banned from baseball and there is nothing you can do to change results from those years. They are now banned and tested for and you have to deal with it if you get caught.

If someone comes out and hits 5 homers, tests positive, serves his suspension, then comes back and hits 70 more the rest of the way while passing tests the rest of the year does he get the record? Of course he does. So how are you going to take back things from 5 years ago? You can't. Stop wasting time and figure out a way to improve testing from here on out.

Here is my point. Barry Bonds is an asshole and that is the only reason people want this investigated. If Mark McGwire was in Bonds' position right now, nobody would be asking for more investigating.

Changing the subject slightly, what do you think the effect of amphetamine testing will be on the season? My guess is you'll see some more AAA-shuttling in the summer, and some very bad middle relief pitching by the end of the season ...

(Note: Todd Hollandsworth can take an infinite amount of amphetamines, steroids, monotreme hormones, and/or Hostess Ho-Hos, and he'll still suck, while outperforming Ramon Vazquez. All this young talent, and our bench will blow.)

Whenever I can lead into a Buff dig on Hollandsworth, it was a worthy post!

I think the middle relievers will be shuffled more. They can go down to AAA and probably not have to throw as many "hard" innings. I think this even allows Karsay and Graves to start the year in the majors. You know Karsay will not last the season, so get some innings out of him while his arm still conects to his shoulder, then dump him to the DL for the rest of the year. Graves makes the club, then shuffles to AAA when dead arm hits, then probably comes back up in August for the end of the year push.

The bench will definitely be weak. I think that is the biggest problem with the lower payroll teams. The good thing is these guys are young enough that they should be able to play everyday. My only worry is getting VMart some days off behind the plate. Shoppach should help there.

The way I figure it, a big chunk of the baseball I have watched in my life has been tainted due to players using illegal substances to inflate their stats. I want to see all the assholes involved squirm a little bit.

I do think it's unfair to Bonds that he is being targeted despite being just one of many.

But baseball has a real problem on their hands. I heard on the radio this morning that all of baseballs biggest sponsors are letting Selig know they want nothing to do with any of the ceremonies surrounding Bonds surpassing Ruth and then Aaron.

This is maybe the biggest and most referenced record in all of sports. The man that has been the centerpiece of the biggest scandal in the last 50 years of the sport is going to break it.

Also troublesome for baseball is what they may find when they open Pandoras Box. And what can they do about any of it? Despite the mountains of testimony and testimonials in Book of Shadows, and the others they will uncover ... they're not going to be able to prove anything.

Selig feels he has to do something with Aarons record looming. His only alternative is to do absolutely nothing, throw his hands in the air, and say "we fucked up! sorry!"

The thing that bugs me about MLB's new investigation is that I remain convinced that it is only happening because of Bonds.

Of course, Bonds used roids.
Of course, one's opinion on Bonds' (and other assumed steroids users) entry in the HoF depends on one's judgment as to whether it goes to the HoF's "standard" regarding character.
Of course, Bonds' numbers deserve some sort of mental adjustment....But I admit to being a sucker for 70+ HRs and a .500+ OBP. And, actually, look at his B-R page again. The only HR total that is significantly out of whack is the 73...if it hadn't been for the 73, his HR totals from '93 to '04 would be remarkably consistent. Granted, even that HR total may be roid aided, as the drugs helped him avoid injury. But, those OBPs from 2001-04 show a supposed cardinal rule of the game being broken: you're supposed to fail more often than you succeed.

But, even though there was a steroid problem is MLB from the mid-90s to the mid-00s, and Bonds was a part of it, would this investigation be happening if the book about Bonds wasn't released? No. Even if the book had been released, would this investigation be happening if Bonds wasn't playing? No. I'm curious to see what kind of "investigation" is done, beyond all the sluggers who apparently used, into the borderline guys, the pitchers, and so on.

Just heard an interview with MLB President Bob Dupay on Mike & Mike. Alot of what I heard surprised me.

They questioned Dupay about MLBs authority, and mentioned they have no power of the subpoena. Mike & Mike tied this and other things into their take that MLB players aren't going to be very forthcoming or helpful.

Dupay said the commissioner "does have the power to make players appear for questioning" and that if they are silent, unhelpful, or not forthcoming .... that the Comish "has the power to take approrpriate action, including punishing those players in some way". Dupay tied this all into Selig's "best interest of baseball" rights.

Basically, Dupay said it wasn't going to be easy, but that the commissioners office has more power than Roger Cossack or Buster Ohlney (two outspoken critics of what MLB is doing) think he does.

If anyone heard the rest of this interview, chime in. I had to get into the office and only caught the first 6-7 minutes.

First of all, Major League baseball players are a fraternity and they are not going to rat anybody out. If Selig thinks he is going to suspend someone for not answering questions, he is insane. I mean really, if they take Bonds' record away, what are they going to do? Give it to McGwire? Wooops. Sosa? Wooops.

Bud Selig had better be real careful here. What happens if the question gets turned around on him? What if he is asked about his knowledge of steroids. You can't tell me he did not kow these guys were juicing. I knew it. You knew. Everyone knew it. Wasn't Chad Curtis barking about this when it was going on? Didn't Selig ignore it? Why? That's right, after he allowed a strike/lockout to cancel a World Series, they needed to win fans back. And he let MLB become the WWF. Now he is going to investigate? Just do everyone a favor Bud. Admit there was a problem. Admit you knew about it. And retire. You are pathetic.

Best Interest of Baseball (or other sport) powers are broad, but they are not infinite.

Part of the problem with professional sports in general is that they really are very unusual entities...this goes beyond just the simple steroids issue, but pro sports is a very unique industry, where there is a blend of cooperation and competition among the businesses that is organized by an "Office of the Commissioner."

Even if this investigation finds that Players A, B and C used steroids (either by player admission or sufficient contradictory evidence) there is going to be no adequate punishment or remedy. Any sanction sufficiently severe to placate whoever it is that is pushing for this (fans? media? Congress?) is going to be arbitrated to death. To "strike records" is meaningless, and just prolongs the controversy. To fine players would draw a yawn, considering their already considerable wealth. To suspend them...well, see below for one possible outcome. And, in a case, you've still probably only sanctioned a fraction of the players who used, many of which are probably already retired and escaped heavy scrutiny while playing.

Another issue is a possible competitive one: I heard on the radio today that some of the New York papers are displeased with the fact that George Mitchell, a member of the Red Sox Board of Directors, will be heading the investigation. Now, I don't think Mitchell would have a real conflict of interest problem, but I can imagine that some teams - if asked to cooperate with the investigation - just might.

Let's say, hypothetically, that MLB was successfully enforcing contemporary punishment for past steroid use...and let's say that the Indians happened to have evidence that Jim Thome and Manny Ramirez used steroids while with the Indians... and, they hadn't planned to release the evidence, but well MLB is really serious about it now, so...

I think this investigation, like the steroid policy, is a joke. Bug Selig's back is against the wall at this point. He let the juicing go on for too long in a piss poor attempt to save his league. He thought the fans wanted to see NFL sized meatheads (Sosa and McGwire) bash 500 ft homers at a record pace. This thing has snowballed far beyond anyone's expectations and now Selig has seen Major League Baseball turn into a friggin circus. Not only has American baseball become a disgrace, the great ballplayers of the past are being robbed of their records by walking medicine cabinets. No matter what comes out of this "investigation", Bonds will surpass Hank Aaron and get into the Hall of Fame. It may be unfair to target Bonds alone, but he doesn't deserve pity from anyone. He could have taken the high road years ago, like Giambi did, but he is a coward and a cheat. So I say run his bloated ass up the flagpole man! Do you think Pete Rose was the only guy in the Majors betting on baseball? Hell no. But they wanted to make a statement. And they did. Selig doesn't have the balls to go after Bonds.
And shame on the players union too. They fought tooth and nail to avoid steroid testing. Gee, I wonder why? Forget the bogus investigation. Implement a real testing policy. And start kicking these guys right out of the league.

i saw an interview with joe torre last night on cnbc and said he feels this investigation is a joke. he feels that they were not testing for it so none of these guys should be punished healso says there is nothing they can do about it now .
barry bonds is the best player we have seen in any of our life time roids or no roids ,
. .
the most amazing stat i saw from his record setting year was that he did not break a bat untill after the allstar break no roids can help that

there are alot of guys who alot smaller this year than last alot smaller

That may be so, but do you really think this is what is best for baseball? I am a fan, and i don't like what the game has become. I will admit the Sosa/McGwire run was a great thing to witness. In retrospect, I would trade that in for the times when 30 homers in a season was something special.

That may be so, but do you really think this is what is best for baseball? I am a fan, and i don't like what the game has become. I will admit the Sosa/McGwire run was a great thing to witness. In retrospect, I would trade that in for the times when 30 homers in a season was something special.

Define what you mean by "best for baseball"?

Clearly economically it was - and isn't that really the only measure that counts?

If it isn't, what other measure is there?

Does "best for baseball" attempt to capture some halcyon days image of guys playing for the love of the game who would play for food money?

There are alot of things that baseball does that are not the "best for baseball" as far as I am concerned. Forcing us to watch pitchers swing a bat while looking like Lindsay Lohan after a trip to the bathroom to, um, blow her nose, announcers comparing the double switch to cold fusion, the Indians employing Ramon Vazquez, I could go on all day, but I am not sure what good that would do. If the impact of these either helps create money for MLB, or at a minimum keeps things revenue neutral, then it is the best for baseball.

The bottom line for me is, if the fans like it, isn't that by definition "the best for baseball"? And the fans clearly liked it, they liked it just fine. Current feigning of moral indignation not withstanding.

But me int he column of who gives a flying fuck. If guys want to become guinea pigs in order to chase the dream, that is all right by me.

Perhaps we could start a LibertarianBaseball Leauge (LBL) where we dont give a shit what other people do to their bodies as long as they don't cause us harm.

I knew it. The bait was set, and the bait was taken. If I still hadn't heard from you in another couple weeks, I was gonna start a debate on Matt Clement ... and start up the argument on the relativity of payroll and wins.

Perhaps we could start a LibertarianBaseball Leauge (LBL) where we dont give a shit what other people do to their bodies as long as they don't cause us harm.

As I read that quote, I realized ...

In life, I take that stance. In baseball, I oppose it.

Ironic.

And regarding Selig, steroids were best for baseball back in 1998, as the sport looked to recapture fans from the labor strifes.

NOW, after 70 ... and 73 ... and kids like Steve Bechler dying ... and three books exposing the abuse, steroids are no longer best for baseball.

Dupay this morning was predictably defending Selig, saying he was calling for testing as early as 1994, when guys like Buster Ohlney didn't write nary a column about it.

I blame Selig, I blame Fehr ... no one gave a shit. Not even the fans. I remember laughing off The Brady Anderson Experiment. Remember? Heres Brady Andersons HR totals from 1990 to 2000 ...

7, 6, 3, 8, 4, 7, 55, 2, 4, 6

I never knew it would get as bad as it did. I guess it never registered with me that guys that could hit 50-55 clean would start using.

Im pissed because baseball is more sacred to me than the other sports. Not that there hasn't been cheating going on in baseball for many years. I actually like that about baseball. Emery board, stealing signs, et al.

But what the whole steroids thing was allowed to evolve to has tainted twenty years of the sport. Some of the most famous records in all of sports, that should still exist, are now broken and tainted.

At this point, I'm like "fuck it". I want to know as much as possible to better put into perspective the taint. I want all the cheaters exposed.

It's not a matter of morals dude. To me, it's about some people following the rules, and other people not. It's cheating. I agree with you when you say it's ok if Johnny Steroid wants to shoot himself full of juice to enhance his career only if it is within the rules of the game. If it's legal, than those who play the game without jucing have no gripe. MLB and Selig need to cut the crap. Which is what this post is all about. The phony investigation and bogus "steroid policy." Don't pretend to give a shit about players using performance enhancing substances when you really don't.

Maybe the current state of the game is great from a financial standpoint. But, I am sick of having to hear about Balco and The Clear and the Cream, and Bonds, and books, and Jose Canseco, and on and on. This cloud has been hanging over the game since Big Mac had Andro in his locker back in 98.

Im pissed because baseball is more sacred to me than the other sports. Not that there hasn't been cheating going on in baseball for many years. I actually like that about baseball. Emery board, stealing signs, et al.

.

And I think this is your problem (said in a non-condescending way)

How can you get all fired up about what steroids might do to sacred records...but somehow rationalize away what the impacts of integration, designated hitters, lower/raising of mounds, dead balls, domes, designer banjo parks, proliferation of night ball and what that may or may not do to flight of a ball, the obvious doctoring of balls you reference...I could go on all day.

The fact you hold those numbers sacred, when you could drop a septic tank full of evidence to the contrary on your head, is the real issue here. Those numbers aren't sacred. they are interesting, but none can be taken at face. Without context they mean nothing...and context strips away at their sacredness...

It really is the big flippin pink elephant in the room that nobody will talk about.

The very idea that the HR list is some sort of sacred list...is bunk....steroids are just the most recent chapter to showing why this is the case.

Apples to oranges. I shouldn't even justify that comparison, but I will. First off, is it a level 4 felony to spit on a baseball? Ok. How about steal a sign? Didn't think so.

Besides that. Stealing signs, spitters, and such are intricacies of the game. They take place on the field for one. Not in some labratory. Secondly, corked bats have been in play for years. Remember Chris Sabo and his corked bat? Did he hit 60+ home runs in a season with it? These things have minimal impact on the game and do not give a player near the advantage as HGH or whatever else these guys are on.

yargs7 wrote:Apples to oranges. I shouldn't even justify that comparison, but I will. First off, is it a level 4 felony to spit on a baseball? Ok. How about steal a sign? Didn't think so.

Besides that. Stealing signs, spitters, and such are intricacies of the game. They take place on the field for one. Not in some labratory. Secondly, corked bats have been in play for years. Remember Chris Sabo and his corked bat? Did he hit 60+ home runs in a season with it? These things have minimal impact on the game and do not give a player near the advantage as HGH or whatever else these guys are on.

In other words, you are just fine with cheating if people have been doing it for a long time or you think the level of advantage gained is in line with what is OK with you...but if someone comes up with a new way to cheat or gets too big of an advantage...then there is a problem?

I meant "you" as in MLB. Not you personally. Should have specified that.

Ah, sure, that makes more sense!

My take is that MLB should say, in effect, "We as a sport were wrong to turn a blind eye to the mounting and pervasive evidence of performance-enhancing drugs in the sport. We made a grave error in not addressing this problem, and we are deeply embarrassed by our inaction.

However, it serves no useful purpose to waste time, money, and effort to distinguish the performances of the recent past. Instead, we draw the proverbial line in the sand at the point Right Now, and declare that any conclusive proof of the use of performance-enhancing drugs will be pursued to conclusion and punished to its full extent. This includes holding onto samples until reliable test for currently-undetectable drugs or hormones can be developed, just as with Olympic athletes. This includes pressing for blood tests instead of urine tests. We seek to be the model of all professional sports leagues worldwide from this point forward. To accommodate this, we look forward, and not back, and simply turn the page on the chapter that has, for all intents and purposes, has been written, published, and archived. Huzzah!"

(I added the "Huzzah!" I do not expect Bud Selig to ever utter these syllables.)

yargs7 wrote:Apples to oranges. I shouldn't even justify that comparison, but I will. First off, is it a level 4 felony to spit on a baseball? Ok. How about steal a sign? Didn't think so.

....

In other words, you are just fine with cheating if people have been doing it for a long time or you think the level of advantage gained is in line with what is OK with you...but if someone comes up with a new way to cheat or gets too big of an advantage...then there is a problem?

Wowzers.

I read the deal-breaker to be criminality. Can you address this notion instead?

I read the deal-breaker to be criminality. Can you address this notion instead?

.

Perhaps a misread on my part...I took the term "cheating" at face value.

That being said, Dock Ellis threw a no-hitter on LSD.

I am guessing that a sizeable portion of MLB was blowing coke, or smoking pot or god knows what else in the 80's. (for one example).

Steve Howe...need I say more?

There is a long and storied history of drug addicts in baseball (to focus on one area of criminality...and not even getting into the old timers who boozed up during prohibition - or even touching on the speeders in todays game that the people who are outraged about HR's don't give a shit about)...yet there are not wildcat strikes in the streets to expunge their records, investigate them, blah, blah, blah.

Break the law...let the law deal with it. I see no reason why breaking the law is an issue...we don't target wife beaters for removal from hitting lists (hello, Kirby)...so why this?

I don't see how cocaine can help anyone hit a baseball further, nor do I see how beating your wife can increase your batting average, unless you are taking practice cuts on HER. Just implement a serious steroid policy from this point on. That's all that can be done.

Awesome! Great discussion everyone! I am in the middle of a 30 hour run at work and can't wiat to get some shuteye and chime in some more. For now I will leave you with this:

If cheating is your problem, you are in love with the wrong game.
If legality is your problem, then I give you the league that has suspended Steve Howe 432 times for cocaine.
If performance enhancement is your problem, imagine what Mickey Mantle could have done in his career with a few cortizone shots every few weeks.

(Warning: Devil's Advocacy ahead. This is not my position, but a more interesting argument.)

If you can show a positive statistical significance between domestic violence and baseball performance, I would consider it to fall under the same umbrella. I can show that steroids enhance performance. I can show that steroids are illegal without prescription. Therefore steroid use falls into the class I am defining.

(Aside: I wonder if one of these guys will come forward with a prescription? And yargs, what if they do? It's not illegal with a prescription, so what's the objection now?)

Now, for example, I would broaden the class to include illegal gambling, but I believe this is already addressed within baseball, so I won't pursue it.

Let me think ... I need an illegal activity, which has a demonstrable positive effect on the games. Demonstable, because I don't want to include tax evasion or public nudity or shit I don't think affects the outcome of a game. Positive, because I don't think a guy shooting heroin is going to perform better than a guy who isn't. Illegal, performance-enhancing. Okay, yep, I like it.

I get steroids (which broadly includes HGH). Maybe amphetamines? I would include them, yes, let's. That's about all I got. You got something else you wanna throw in the bag?

yargs7 wrote:I don't see how cocaine can help anyone hit a baseball further, nor do I see how beating your wife can increase your batting average, unless you are taking practice cuts on HER. Just implement a serious steroid policy from this point on. That's all that can be done.

Pardon me if I am getting dizzy, but the target appears to be moving, um, alot.

Is your problem that:

1) It is cheating?

If so, you have already contradicted yourself by saying small amounts of cheating are OK as long as they have been around awile.

2) It is illegal?

If it is illegal, it doesn't matter if it helps you are not, you are opposing on grounds it is illegal.

3) It is illegal AND helps you perform?

Hello speeders. Are you suggesting an investigation into greenies...and if so, what will you do when people just "legally" switch to Water Joe by the gallon with no-doz and mountain dew espresso...yeah, it's legal...yeah, it helps you with those day after night games...same impact, but legal...so I guess it is OK.

Im pissed because baseball is more sacred to me than the other sports. Not that there hasn't been cheating going on in baseball for many years. I actually like that about baseball. Emery board, stealing signs, et al.

.

And I think this is your problem (said in a non-condescending way)

How can you get all fired up about what steroids might do to sacred records...but somehow rationalize away what the impacts of integration, designated hitters, lower/raising of mounds, dead balls, domes, designer banjo parks, proliferation of night ball and what that may or may not do to flight of a ball, the obvious doctoring of balls you reference...I could go on all day.

The fact you hold those numbers sacred, when you could drop a septic tank full of evidence to the contrary on your head, is the real issue here. Those numbers aren't sacred. they are interesting, but none can be taken at face. Without context they mean nothing...and context strips away at their sacredness...

It really is the big flippin pink elephant in the room that nobody will talk about.

The very idea that the HR list is some sort of sacred list...is bunk....steroids are just the most recent chapter to showing why this is the case.

gnati, you just made my argument for me.

Despite all the very real variables you just mentioned the great baseball records HAVE withstood the test of time. Despite the fact that parks are smaller, mounds raised, the athletes are better condtioned ... Hack Wilson, Roger Maris, Joe Dimaggio ... all their marks stood strong through it all.

I won't argue that the steroid scandal doesn't have some parallels to the other factors you mentioned. I do think it's the most pronounced and serious of all of them though. I simply see hitters, artificially strengthening their bodies, as having more of a factor on the game than doctored balls, night baseball, or any of the other things you referenced. My argument is that those things have had an impact, but not near as great a one as steroids did.

The home run is the most exciting play in all of sports. It does bother me that a record that was legitmately achieved, and stood for 40 years, is now an unreachable joke. And that the players that broke it were cheating their asses off.

gnati wrote:But much like the guy with the perscription, what do you do with the guy who downs a bottle of no-doz before games? Legal...yet achieves an advantage...

Well, this is why I have "Illegal" in my policy. I am all for performance-enhancement. In fact, I demand it! Weight-lifting is performance-enhancing. Practice is performance-enhancing. Coaching is performance-enhancing. I don't just approve of those things, I DEMAND them of "my players."

And cortisone ... what a wonderful thing. You bet, cortisone shots for everyone! Huzzah! If they criminalize cortisone, though, you know what my policy says? No cortisone for you! Huzzah once again!

Illegal. Performance-enhancing. It's clear. It's concise. And it's inclusive. One without the other, I care not a whit. Both together, you are a Bad Boy. I dunno, it sounds pretty tight from here.

gnati wrote:Which is why I keep coming back to I don't give a shit...fuck with your body, your problem, not mine.

Play ball.

It's a policy, not a mantra. I do conjure visions of Phil Hartmann in the "No Rules Olympics," however.

yargs7 wrote:I don't see how cocaine can help anyone hit a baseball further, nor do I see how beating your wife can increase your batting average, unless you are taking practice cuts on HER. Just implement a serious steroid policy from this point on. That's all that can be done.

Pardon me if I am getting dizzy, but the target appears to be moving, um, alot.

Is your problem that:

1) It is cheating?

If so, you have already contradicted yourself by saying small amounts of cheating are OK as long as they have been around awile.

2) It is illegal?

If it is illegal, it doesn't matter if it helps you are not, you are opposing on grounds it is illegal.

3) It is illegal AND helps you perform?

Hello speeders. Are you suggesting an investigation into greenies...and if so, what will you do when people just "legally" switch to Water Joe by the gallon with no-doz and mountain dew espresso...yeah, it's legal...yeah, it helps you with those day after night games...same impact, but legal...so I guess it is OK.

Let me hold still with the bullseye for a minute here.
#1-Cheating-I refuse to compare spit balls and cork to performance enhancing drugs. Yes, spit balls are illegal in the game of baseball. But seriously. To say that they are parallel to each other is ridiculous. Steroids have changed the game dramatically. I could care less about the physical threats that come from prolonged use of steroids, what I do care about is the enormous advantage it gives one player over another.
#2-Legality-I think that players should be held to some sort of standard when it comes to off the field behavior. Most people in this country would lose their jobs if they are convicted of assualt, sexual offenses, or drug violations. Why shouldn't pro athletes.
#3-So, yes, my beef is two fold. Illegal and enhances performance.

yargs7 wrote:Steroids have changed the game dramatically. I could care less about the physical threats that come from prolonged use of steroids, what I do care about is the enormous advantage it gives one player over another.

Out of curiosity, how will your opinion be impacted when the inevitable happens: legal supplements are improved to the point where they do everything you want steroids to do without the dangerous side effects?

Despite the fact that parks are smaller, mounds raised, the athletes are better condtioned ... Hack Wilson, Roger Maris, Joe Dimaggio ... all their marks stood strong through it all

#1 - the mounds have been lowered throughout time, not raised.
#2 The reason there records are still around? The game is so much deeper. If Roger Maris had to face a left hander brought into a game just to get him out, he doesn't hit 61. If Dimaggio had to face a 3 different pichers in 45 of those 56 games, he probably doesn't get to 56.

The most simplistic way to put my opinion is this. We all know what is happening. Unfortunately, the game and the world are different places than they were 50 years ago. This investigation is garbage and will only further tarnish the image of the game. Test the shit out of these guys. Catch anyone who is currently taking roids. Deal with what is happening now, not what happened before the policy was implemented.

If Mark McGwire was at 700 homers, would there be an investigation? I say no.

yargs7 wrote:Steroids have changed the game dramatically. I could care less about the physical threats that come from prolonged use of steroids, what I do care about is the enormous advantage it gives one player over another.

Out of curiosity, how will your opinion be impacted when the inevitable happens: legal supplements are improved to the point where they do everything you want steroids to do without the dangerous side effects?

If it's legal and and allowed by the league, then I have no problem. Let's face it. Players in every sport are bigger, faster, and stronger than ever. This evolution, if you will, has increased the level of play in every pro sports league. I do, however, have a problem with the fact that major league baseball has allowed players like Sosa, McGwire, Bonds, and many others to gain a major advantage over the players who have stayed clean and played by the rules.

Let me ask this question. Is it fair for a young, up and coming prospect with loads of talent and a great work ethic to have to take the risk of using steroids just to compete with the players who are juicing?

Despite all the very real variables you just mentioned the great baseball records HAVE withstood the test of time. Despite the fact that parks are smaller, mounds raised, the athletes are better condtioned ... Hack Wilson, Roger Maris, Joe Dimaggio ... all their marks stood strong through it all.

I guess the only response to this is only because people refuse to question the absurdity of them standing the test of time and see how ridiculous it is.

. I could care less about the physical threats that come from prolonged use of steroids, what I do care about is the enormous advantage it gives one player over another.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I find your standards bizarre. You are OK with some illegal/cheating as long as the benefits aren't huge.

Will you audit my taxes for me instead of the IRS?

#2-Legality-I think that players should be held to some sort of standard when it comes to off the field behavior. Most people in this country would lose their jobs if they are convicted of assualt, sexual offenses, or drug violations. Why shouldn't pro athletes.

I don;t know, but I am pretty sure you poo-poo'd my Kirby Puckett comment earlier...have we come full circle?

#3-So, yes, my beef is two fold. Illegal and enhances performance.

So if beating your wife calms your nerves and makes you a better player...a suspension is forthcoming or if hiring 40 hookers to blow you gives you confidence to hit Randy Johnson...your records are expunged?

yargs7 wrote:If it's legal and and allowed by the league, then I have no problem. Let's face it. Players in every sport are bigger, faster, and stronger than ever. This evolution, if you will, has increased the level of play in every pro sports league. I do, however, have a problem with the fact that major league baseball has allowed players like Sosa, McGwire, Bonds, and many others to gain a major advantage over the players who have stayed clean and played by the rules.

But won't the "major advantage" of Sosa, McGwire, Bonds, etc. look pretty trifling when we're looking back on it 50yrs from now?

Let me ask this question. Is it fair for a young, up and coming prospect with loads of talent and a great work ethic to have to take the risk of using steroids just to compete with the players who are juicing?

No, it's not fair. But it's no less fair for them than it was for Bonds, IMO. People like Jim Rome have made light of the allegation that Bonds, in part, decided to start taking roids after seeing all the attention Mac & Sosa received in '98, dismissing it as childish jealousy. I think you can just as easily look at it as the generation's greatest player wanting to be remembered as such and doing whatever necessary to ensure that was the case, and I don't see any reason to make him out to be some kind of villain for that.

Illegal. Performance-enhancing. It's clear. It's concise. And it's inclusive. One without the other, I care not a whit. Both together, you are a Bad Boy. I dunno, it sounds pretty tight from here.

gnati wrote:Which is why I keep coming back to I don't give a shit...fuck with your body, your problem, not mine.

.

Illegal and performance enhancing...OK, is that illegal in society or by rules of baseball or both? What if they contradict?

Can you define performance enhancing? For example, what if partaking in an illegal activity gives you a mental edge...does that count? Why or why not?

and a non-related issue...I mentioned the use of Coke and LSD and pot...but was told they aren't performance enhancing, they actually hurt performance, so there isnt a problem. Leaving that specifics of that debate aside and taking it at face...if those drugs decrease performance, aren't they in actually performance enhancers...for the players they are playing against? How many home runs did Fergie Jenkins give up while high? Why do those HR's not have the same scrutiny that Bonds' do? Should anyone who hit an HR off of Dock Ellis have an asterisk? Any pitcher that struck out Tim Raines while he was carrying viles of coke in his back pocket...have those numbers subtracted?

I see your point about Bonds. And it's a good point. But, do you think Barry Bonds wasn't good enough naturally to be the best all around player in the game? I mean the guy was already a 3 time MVP before 1998.

He may not have been able to continue to put up insane numbers as he got older without some help from performance enhancing substances, but he still would have been regarded as one of the all time greats.

I certainly don't sympathize for Barry Bonds. He pretty much villianized himself by acting like...well, Barry Bonds.